CNN Has Now Become the Mouthpiece for the Terrorists Propaganda Campaign

Sort of depends really on how you look at Vietnam. Was Vietnam a separate war outside of the Cold War or was Vietnam just a battle withink the Cold War? As a separate war the U.S. lost. If you look at Vietnam through the Cold War perspective, then losing in Vietnam is irrelevant in the big picture.

The problem with Vietnam, much like Iraq is that the war wasn't really needed and was only used to make money for the weapons industry and to maim and kill U.S. soliders and local citizens of the land.

Could the Cold War have been won without the war in Vietnam? IMHO, yes.

Is the war in Iraq helping to win the "War on Terror"? IMHO, no.

So what did we learn today boys and girls, that are government is incapable of learning from past mistakes.

 

Bush wants to frame Iraq as an integral part of the war on terror. He got what he wanted. Many terrorists throughout the world have gathered in Iraq to fight the Americans. It is now part of the War on Terror, because Bush and the terrorists made it so. I didn't agree with Bush's decision to enter the war at all, but I agree with him on this point: "If the Americans leave, the terrorists win."

If the Americans leave, the Kurds and Shi'ites will separate their respective areas from Iraq, the elected government will go to ****, and central Iraq (the area around Baghdad where most of the Sunnis are) will become a terrorist haven. This would be a huge victory for the terrorists, and a huge defeat for the Americans. The terrorists would have gotten an even better base of operations (Iraq) than they had before (Afghanistan), and they would have had a huge morale boost, which helps a lot when recruiting people.

So... the Americans have gotten themselves in a quagmire. They're damned if they stay, and they're damned if they leave. Hey, sounds kinda like Vietnam.

 

You've got to be kidding.

 

It isn't too hard. I don't see how you can say they are on the same side.

I don't see any proof of a motive of CNN to demoralize anyone, or an obvious goal of the pullout of American troops.

Furthermore we know that at least Al Qaeda who would be on the side of the Islamists do not want the U.S. troops to pull out, but hope that we stay in Iraq.

We do know that you and Al-Qaeda have the same goals for IRaq.

 

You can't deny it!

Demoralize America and pull out troops. Should CNN succeed in their objective, CNN shareholders will be laughing all the way to the bank as CNN's stocks shoot through the roof. mwaaa hahahah.

Basso is onto something. Can't you see it? What's wrong with you people?

 

______

God forbid CNN report the news accurately.

 

Ummm, if the terrorists were to move into Iraq and set up a base of operations, that would be *great* for us. We'd know where to go kill them. Right now, the problem is we can't freaking find them, and the places we do know they might be (Pakistan-Afghan border), we can't get to.

The best thing that could happen for the US if for them to move from those kinds of remote places to Iraq, where we had a much wider of array of contacts and intelligence access. It's also the reason they won't do it.

 

what? TET was a military disaster for the VC. their only hope was NVA invasion. you think otherwise?

 

LOL!!

Basso and Trader-Jorge comedy returns!!

Good times!

 

Why don't you just join the army Dorothy?

I'm tired of you Nancies supporting the unnecessary slaughter of my military brethren without reason. Put you money where your mouth is princess.

If it's a joke of some kind, nevermind to you, but still, anyone who supports the war without fighting in it is a p***y.

 

one could make the case that the u.s. lost the vietnam war before it even started with their support of diem.

 

In all fairness to Basso, history has shown Tet to have been a military victory for the Americans. It was shown to be something other than that but Tet wasn't the defeat many were led to believe.

 

This is the dumbest argument that the anti-war crowd makes. Someone honestly tell me why someone who supports the war and doesn't enlist is a "p***y."

That's like saying you're a "coward" if you're against murder but don't sign up to become a police officer.

 

or like saying you are aiding the terrorists if you dont support the president.

 

Two things:

1 - It's not the same comparison. Perhaps you should try again.
2 - If it were the same, it still doesn't make it right. I seem to remember being told many times as a child that two wrongs do not make a right.

 

That's the dumbest argument? Really? Really... That is the dumbest argument anti-war people have presented. Not the "no blood for oil" or random conspiracies people mention? Hmmm...

I don't think asking people how much they are committed to the war they support, how much they are willing to invest in it, is dumb. It is certainly not the "dumbest" argument the left makes.

 

The "no blood for oil" argument is dumb. The conspiracies are dumb, as well.

I'll rephrase: the argument in question is a dumb argument. It's not intended to strike up a debate, it's meant to do the same thing as the dumb "supporting terrorist" arguments although they aren't alike in structure.

It's a dumb argument. As I said before it's like saying: You want murder to end? Then why don't you join the police force? Coward!

 

*sigh*

This is also a dumb argument. This is the reason many like myself will be staying home on election day.

 

Are you sure he wouldn't want a Republican government?

As long as they keep looking for him in Iraq he's going to be alright...